
Glass /: ^y-^ 

Book :i^i-^i7^ 



a^aa^n 



<r7 I r^ 



MR. ^LADE, OF TERMONT, 



ON " 



' 'O. 



rHE SUBJECT OF THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY 






AKD 



"^ V 



liJG SI.AVE TRA»E 



WITHIN 



'FHE ©ISTRICT OF COLU.^IBIA. 



DEJLJVERED 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



Dkcember 23, 1835. 



KAllbNAL iNtELUGENXER OFFICE. 

1836. 



u 



,D(.S7 






fa 



SPEECH. 



Th(> question being that depending on the motion of 
!Mr. Pa"'ton, for reconsideration of the vote referring a pe- 
tition to abolish Slavery and the Slave trade within the 
District of Columbia, to the Committee on the District — 

Mr. SLADE said, he had been charged by a large and 
respectable portion of his constituents with the duty of 
presenting memorials of similar import to that under dis- 
cussion; and for that reason, if for no other, he felt bound 
to ask the indulgence of the House to a few remarks. 

He approached the subject, he said, with an oppressive 
sense of its magnitude, and, knowing its exciting charac- 
ter, of the great danger of being betrayed, in the progress 
of its discussion, into a state of feeling, unsuited to the place 
«.iid tlie occasion. It was a subject on which he, as well 
as his constituents, felt most deeply ; and he could neither 
represent their feelings, nor express nis own, nUKout » 
plainness and directness which might give offence. He 
begged gentlemen to believe, however, that he should say 
nothing intended to give the slightest personal offence to 
any; though he should, without fear of any, vindicate the 
petitioners, and assert the claims of those in whose behalf 
they plead. He regretted to hear the memorialists spoken 
of in debate as intruders, and their respectful petitions upon 
a subject of great national importance treated as a vexa- 
tious intermeddling with concerns in which they have no 
interest. Gentlemen must have patience. These petition- 
ers, as far as he was acquainted with them, were among 
the most intelligent and respectable of the community in 
which they reside; while the subject of their petitions was 
one of which it well became them to speak, and the Con- 
gress of the United States to hear. 

The great purpose, said Mr. S., of most ofthose who have 
hitherto spoken upon this subject seems to be to get rid of 
the petitions. The gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Beardsley) wishes to have them all laid on the table, as 
fast as presented, and " nailed" there; and yet he is exceed- 
ingly regardful of the " sacred right of petitioning," wliich 
must, on no account whatever, be impaired ! The gentle- 
men from South Carolina (Messrs. Hammond, Pickens, 
and Thomp.son) are more consistent. They profess to re- 
gard the petitions as disrespectful, and the petitioners as of- 
ficious meddlers with that which does not concern them. 
They, therefore, would have the petitions rejected. There 
is, in this, the merit, at least, of consistency, and the gen- 
tlemen have my thanks for evincing a disposition to meet 
the question fairly. Another gentleman, my honorable 
friend from Massachusetts, (Mr. Adams,) would have the 
petitions committed to the Committee on the District of Co- 
lumbia; in other words, to use his own significant, and, in 
this case, appropriate language — to have them consigned to 
the " family vault of all the Capulets;" and yet he, too, is 
jealous of the " sacred right" of petition! The sacred 
right of petition ! — that is to say, the " sacred right" of be- 
ing " nailed to the table," by the gentleman from New 
York, or the " sacred right" of being gathered by the gen- 
tleman from Massachusetts into the " family vault of all 
the Capulets !" 

Sir, the petitioners well understand the nature of both 
these rights. The last they have long enjoyed, and desire 



to enjoy it no longer. They want tlie (tcVmn of Congress 
on the subject, which, judging from the past, they are sure 
not to have, if it is to depend upon the decisive action of 
the Committee on the District of Columbia. I intend no 
disreBj)ect to that connnittce. To continue to do what has 
been done — that is, to do nothing, would follow of course a 
commitment to them, with an express understanding that 
the petitions were consigned to the tomb, without the hope 
of a resurrection. 

I, sir, said Mr. S., am in favor of the prayer of the peti- 
tioners. I believe that Congress has a right to legislate on 
the subject, and that the time has come when it ought to 
legislate. Something has been suggested with regard to 
political objects connected with the presenting of these pe- 
titions. Sir, I have no sv ' 
any such purpose exists ii 

Tlie^ are uiovcJ by a apiri 

the mingling of any considf •< 

may tend to divert attentioi 

Gentlemen, I regret to sa 

realobjectof the petitioners, ^ x»v.»...iciiiuu» 

of " abolitionists," to the end that the odium which has 
been attached to their measures for effecting the abolition 
of slavery in the States may be transferred to the exercise 
of an acknowledged right of asking Congress to abolish it 
in this District. But what do the petitioners ask at our 
hands'? Why, sir, simply that measures may be taken to 
put an end to slavery here, and especially that here, where 
the flag of freedom floats over the Capitol of this great Re- 
public, and where the authority of that Republic is supreme, 
the trade in human flesh may be aboli.shed. These are the 
questions which gentlemen are called on to meet, but which 
they do not meet, ehher by calling the petitioners "igno- 
rant fanatics," or denouncing them as " murderers and in- 
cendiaries." If, in the fervor of their philanthropy, any 
have adopted measures of more than doubtful expediency, 
for the purpose of acting on the public sentiment in the 
slave States, in favor of immediate emancipation, it surely 
furnishes no reason why we should obstinately shut our . 
eyes to the evils whi i are within our control, ai; ' -"hich 
call loudly for our i- lit:^''. 

I have said, sir, th.. .ni in favor at ■'. pray^ 
petitioners. Let me not oe -ii 'I'l-''''-' ""^he 

of slavery which I would advocaiv., 
I believe the immediate and unqualified a,, 
to be inconsistent with a just regard, both to tu^ :■ . 

ests of the community, and the highest welfare of the h];<.vc. 
The philfinthropy which aims at such an abolition, what- 
ever I may think of its purity, I cannot commend for its 
intelligence or discretion. But though I would have abo- 
lition advance by a gradual progress towards its final con- 
summation, I would have the work begin immediately. Sir, 
I cannot stand here as a freeman, and the Representative 
of freemen, without declaring, in the face of this House 
and of the world, that the right to hold men as goods and 
chattels, subject to sale and transfer, at the will of a master, 
should cease and be discontinued instantly and forever. 

But while I say this, I would not render worse the con- 
dition of the slave, by conferring upon him rights which he 
is not fitted to enjoy, and which would become to him a 



ruree vathcr tlian a blessing. I would not, at once, entire- 
ly emancipate him from the control of his master. But it 
should not be, as now, an arbitrary, unqualiticd control. 
For that control I would substitute the authority of law, 
which should be supreme. In saying this, sir, "I do but 
carry out a principle which has long been dear to me as an 
Anti-mitson. I have maintained, and still maintain, and 
shall continue to maintain, as a cardinal principle in my 
political creed, that, in opposition to all individual, and all 
associated, self-constituted authority, the l.^ws should 
be maintained in full and uncontrolled supremacy. There 
is no being, entitled to the appellation of wan, who should 
not find shelter under the a?gis of their broad and ample pro 
teetion. In applying this principle to the case of the slave, 
hovyever, I would not confer upon him the same rights 
which are possessed by hia master ; and, for the obvious 
reason, that he is not fitted to enjoy them. But I would 
place him under the supervision of laics made for his 
special benefit, and adapted to his new condition — laws 
which should essentially qualify the control of the master 
over him— laws which should protect him in all the rights 
which he is fitted to enjoy, and prepare him for the enjoy- 
ment of those to which it would be but a suicidal philan- 
thropy immediately to admit him. Sir, we owe it to this 
degraded race of men to prepare them for freedom ; to com- 
municate to them moral and religious and literary instruc- 
tion ; to restore and protect the domeslic relations amono- 
them ; to teach them the duties which they owe to God'^ 
and to us, and to one another; and to build upon the foun- 
dation of a conscious responsibility tc the government of 
Heaven and the authority of righteous human laws, a so- 
cial structure which it uhall be our glory to rear, and their 
highest earthly happiness to enjoy. 

But, Mr. Speaker, while I thus repudiate the doctrine of 
the immediate and unqualified abolition of slavery, I main- 
tain the duty oC immediately and absolutely abnliahing tho 
slave trade within the limits of this District. And here I 
come to a part of the subject which gentlemen do not choose 
to approach, but manifestly desire to avoid. In this I com- 
mend their prudence. The slave trade is an evil for which 
they well know there is no defence, and no palliation. I 
regret, sir, that I have not the means of ascertaining its ex- 
tent and character within this District. But the fact that I 
have no such means, furnishes a strong argument for referring 
the petitions to a select committee, raised for the purpose of 
going into a full investigation, and making a full report of 
the facts connected with this traffic. I can, at present, on- 
ly say, I am well assured that the trade is actively carried 
on in the cities both of Washington and Alexandria,* es- 
pecially in the latter, where is a large receptacle for the se- 
curing of slaves purchased in this District and the surround- 
ing country ; from which they are, from time to time, ship- 
ped to supply the markets in the Southern and Southwest- 
ern ports of the United States. I need not say that, what 
is usually connected with the slave trade elsewhere is con- 
nected with it here — the forced and final separation of pa- 
rents and children, of brothers and sisters, of husbands and 

*The following advertisements appear, daily, in the principal 
newspapers in this city : 

"CASH FOR 200 NEGROES, 

" Including both sexes, from twelve to twenty-five years 
of age. Persons having servants to dispose of will find it to 
their interest to give me a call, as I will give higher prices, 
in cash, than any other purchaser who is now in this market. 1 
can at all times be found at the Mechanics' Hall, now kept by 
B. O. Sheckel, and formerly kept by Isaac Beers, on Seventh 
street, a few doors below Lloyd s Tavern, opposite the Centre 
Market. All communications promptly attended to. 

"JAMES BIRCH, 

"dec 4 — dtf Washington City." 

" CASH FOR 500 NEGROES, 

" Including both sexes, from twelve to twenty-five years of 
age. Persons having likely servants to dispose of, will find it 
to their interest to give us a call, as we will give higher prices 
in cash, than any other purchaser who is now, or may hereafter 
come into market. 

" FRANKLIN & ARMFIELD." 

" Alexandria, April G — d&sw." 



wives— the utter annihilation of all the endearing relations 
of human life, and the substitution of tlic single relation 
which property bears to its absolute proprietor . 

Sir, shall this trade in human flesh be permitted to con- 
tinue in the very heart of this Republic ? Shall the law re- 
main upon our statute book, which solemnly pronounces 
the citizen of the United States who is found engaged in the 
slave trade upon the high seas " a pirate," and dooms him 
to " suffer death," while here, in sight of this very Capitol, 
the same trade is carried on with impunity'? Shall our citi- 
zens, who make merchandise of men upon the ocean, be 
hunted as outlaws, while here, the same offenders against 
the human race are suffered to pursue the guilty traffic un- 
molested? Sir, this subject demands a searching investiga- 
tion. Will gentlemen deny such investigation! Shall 
the petitions which ask for it be " nailed to the table," or 
"buried in the tomb of all the Capulets!" I trust they will 
not be thus disposed of, and that no fear of" excitement" 
will deter us from probing the subject to the bottom, and 
administering a prompt and effectual remedy. 

I have, Mr. Speaker, spoken plainly and decidedly, be- 
cause it is due to the people whom I have the honor to rep- 
resent, that I should thus speak. It seems to me, sir, that 
the sentiments of the people of the North are not fairly un- 
derstood here on this subject. 

An honorable gentleman from New Hampshire (^r. 
Pierce) has said that not one in five hundred of his con- 
stituents were in favor of the object of these petitions; and 
other gentlemen have been understood to assert that the 
great mass of the northern people arc opposed to any action 
of Congress upon the subject. To sustain this view of the 
matter, the resolutions of public meetings at the North, dis- 
approving certain measures of the abolitionists, have been 
adverted to. I am well aware, sir,of the import of tho»c re 
solutions, and think I understand something of the nature 
<-,rtbnt puV^lio ocjitlniciit which they indicate. And I must 
be permitted to say, that I believe gentlemen are much mis- 
taken in supposing that they furnish evidence that the ge- 
neral sen ti-nent at the North is opposed to the favorable 
action of Congress upon the memorials which are now 
on your table. No, sir; the meetings which adopted the 
resolutions in question were got up with no reference to 
this subject. What are the facts 1 The Southern coun- 
try had been suddenly flooded from the North with anti- 
slavery publications ; and Northern meetings were, there- 
upon, convened to disavow a participation in the obnoxious 
measure, and to express their disapprobation of it. This 
they did, indeed, in strong, decided language. But let not 
gentlemen mistake the import of all this. It was the 7nfa- 
sure to which T have alluded which brought into existence 
these meetings, and it was this against which their pro- 
ceedings were mainly directed. The question of the abo- 
lition of slavery and the slave trade in this District was not 
agitated. It is not so much as alluded to in the resolutions 
of the Philadelphia, New York, or Boston meetings; but 
the doctrine of immediate abolition, and the " extravagant 
proceedings" (to use the language of the New York resolu- 
tions) of the abolitionists constitute the burden of them 
all. 

Sir, there are very many of those who are disposed to 
press upon Congress the duty of granting the prayer of 
these petitions, who did not and do not approve the views 
and measures to which I have adverted ; and it is due to 
frankness to say, sir, that I am among that number. I have 
never been able to perceive the expediency or propriety of 
attempting to inundate the South with even unexceptionable 
publications on this subject, much less those having a direct 
tendency to excite the passions of the slave, and tempt him 
to force the bondage which it is not for him to break, but 
for others to unloose. I admire, indeed, the purity of the 
philanthropy which seeks to abolish the institution of slave- 
ry, and elevate the degraded children of Africa from the con- 
dition of property to the privileges of men, but I deplore its 
often misdirected zeal, and deprecate the reaction which it 
is calculated to produce. The abolition of slavery in the 
States must be their own work. To convince them that 
tho whole system is ruinous and wrong, is not the labor of a 
day or a year. All the questions connected with this sub- 
ject are eminently practical questions, and nothing can be 



more obvious than the danger of faihng to accomplish any 
thing by a premature effort to accomplish at once ail that 
an ardent philanthropy may desire. 

I have said that the public sentiment at the North is not 
understood on this subject. I believe, sir, it is greatly misun- 
derstood. A large majority of the people are opposed to 
certain views and measures, connected with the proposed 
abolition of slaverj' in the States ; but they entertain, at 
the same time, an irreconcilable aversion to the institution 
of slavery, in all its forms. The most conclusive evidence 
of this is furnished in all the proceedings at the North, 
which have been adverted to, in this debate, as an index of 
public sentiment there. Thus, the preamble to the Bos- 
ton resolutions declares — " We hold this truth to be in- 
" disputable, that the condition of slavery finds no advo- 
" cates among our citizens. Our laws do not authorize it; 
" our principles revolt against it ; our citizens will not tole- 
" rate its existence among them." 

This, sir, expresses, I believe, the universal sentiment at 
the North on this subject. It is a sentiment which is not 
the production of a momentary excitement, but is deeply 
seated in the sober and settled convictions of the public 
mind. And, sir, let me assure gentlemen that no expres- 
sions of disapprobation in regard to the yneasures of "abo- 
litionists," or doubts as to the practicability of immediate 
emancipation, are to be taken as evidence that the "princi- 
ples" of the Northern people have ceased to "revolt against" 
slavery ; or that they will not avail themselves of every 
suitable occasion to discuss it, as well as of all reasonable 
and constitutional means of remed3'ing the evil. The sla- 
very of the States they know they cannot reach, but by 
moral influence ; and that influence they think can be 
made most effectual through kind and respectful, though 
earnest and urgent appeals to the Southern interest and 
the Southern conscience. But slavery here, they regard 
as within the competency of national legislation, and hold 
themselves, in common with the whole country, directly 
responsible for its continuance. And I need hardly say 
that there is a very general desire that measures may be 
immediately taken, looking to its final abolition : and espe- 
cially that what has, by almost the whole civilized worU, 
come to be accounted piracy upon the high seas, shall no 
longer be suffered to go unpunished and unmolested in the 
capital of this Republic. 

The venerable member from Massachusetts (Mr.AD.*M3) 
has said, and said truly, that opposition to slavery is, with 
the people of the North, a ■Miigious princifJe. An honor- 
able gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Jones) replies, by ask- 
ing, with emphasis, whether it is the rteHgionof the Savioui 
of men'? Sir, I did not expect to hear such a question seri- 
ously propounded here. I was not prepared for an intima- 
tion that that religion justified the holdingof human being.s 
as property. Why, sir, what is the great, leading, moral 
precept put forth by that Saviour, whose name is thus in- 
voked to sanction the practice of slavery? 

" All things whatsoever ye would th.^t men should 
do unto you, do ye even so to them." 

Sir, I will attempt no commentary on this precept. It 
needs none. I will only say that it contains the seminal 
principle of the pure and elevated morality of the Christian 
system — a morality so congenial with the spirit, and so 
constantly enforced by the example of its Divine Author, 
while upon earth. 

Now, sir, let gentlemen show me that Africans are not 
" men," and I will give up the argument. But, until this 
is done; until the declaration is blotted from the Book of 
Revelation, that " God hath made of one blood all nations 
of men, to dwell on all the face of the earth:" and until 
this great truth ceases to find a response in every human 
bosom, shall slavery stand rebuked by this all-comprehen- 
sive and sublime precept of the Saviour of men. 

But, sir, the religion which contains this precept, also 
enjoins submission to the "powers that be." The same 
mouth which uttered it said, "render unto Caesar tlie things 
which are Caesar's" — a ])recept coincident with that which 
exhorts — " servants be obedient to your own masters; not 
answering again ; not purloining, but showing all good 
fidelity." The Saviour made it no part of his business, 
while upon earth, to subvert the existing order of things. 



or to prescribe specific regulations for the administration of 
civil government. But he came to redeem men from sin — 
to write the law of love upon their hearia — lo est-abiish 
principles and proclaim precepts, betbre whose searching 
and all-pervading influence the time-honored systems of 
injustice and op[)ression shall melt away. 

Permit me now, Mr. Speaker, to examine, for a few mo- 
ments, some of the objections which are urged against the 
legislation of Congress on this subject. 

We are told, io the first place, that this is a question 
which concerns exclusively the people of this District; that 
the petitioners have no interest in it, and have nomore right 
to ask Congress to abolish slavery here than they have to 
petition the Legislature of Virginia to abolish it within her 
limits. 

Sir, the people who have signed these petitions regard 
themselves as citizens, not alone of the particular States in 
which they reside, but of the Republic. Every interest 
within the scope of the legislation of Congress is their in- 
terest. Every thing which concerns this Territory con- 
cerns them : its jwlice ; the value and security of the public 
property within its limits; and the safety of the Represen- 
tative bodies annually a.ssembled here. This is the growing 
capital of a great Republic. What may be the absolute 
01 relative increase of its slave population, or how much it 
may affect the future condition of this District, cannot easi- 
ly be foreseen. That population amounted, in 1830, to 
more than G,000. The time may come when it will amount 
to ten times that number. And is it of no importance to 
our country whether its Capitol shall be surrounded by a 
mass of hardy, independent freevien, ready to peril their 
lives in defending it, as well as themselves, from the inva- 
sion of a foreign Power or whether it shall be guarded by 
60,000 slaves, who, instead of rallying in its defence, may 
hail the invader as an angel of deliverance from their bond- 
age 1 And .is not this subject invested with additional in- 
terest, when it is considered that the Congress of the United 
States will be surrounded by such an amount of such a po- 
pulation 1 Have the petitioners, then, as a part of the 
American people, no interest in this question 1 

And then, too, there is the character of the country as it 
may be affected by the institutions within the Territory, 
where the legislative power of that country is supreme. Is 
slavery tolerated in this Di.strict 1 The petitioners feel 
themselves, in some sense, responsible for it. Is merchan- 
dise made of men, within sight of the Capitolin which their 
Representatives are assembled, and on whose summit wave 
the stripes and the stars of freedom "? As Americans, they 
keenly feel the reproach, and instinctively reach forth their 
hands to wipe out the stain from the escutcheon of their 
country. 

But, in tlie second place, it is asserted that Congress has 
no right to legislate on this subject; that, however great may 
be the evil of slavery or the slave trade within this District, 
it is an evil which must be borne, since authority to remedy 
it is not to be found among the powers granted in the Con- 
stitution. 

And what are the powers of Congress touching this sub- 
ject 1 Is it true that Congress is authorized to extend its 
legislation to the high seas, even to the very coast of Afri- 
ca, and to prohibit the traffic in slaves, under the penalty 
of detjth, while it is powerless to reach the same evil in the 
very heart of the Republic'? If the grant of powers 7nust 
be so construed — if there is clearly no authority by which 
the Government can act in this matter, then must we sub- 
mit to the evil, and wait an amendment of the Constitution, 
which shall make it consistent with itself, and save the 
country from reproach. 

But, sir, fortunately for the country, the Constitution, 
through which we derive our powers, is not thus defective. 
The power to legislate upon this subject is granted ; and 
that, not by remote implication, but in terms of obvious and 
familiar import. Tlie 8th section of the first article gives to 
Congress authority "to exercise exclusive legisl&tion, in all 
cases whatsoerer,o\cr such district (not exceeding ten miles 
square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the ac- 
ceptance of Congress, become the seat of Government of the 
United States." 

In the first place, let i^ be observed, the power of Con- 



6 



gress to legislate in this District is exclusive. 7'hcre is no 
other jurisdiction, cither concurrent or conflicting. The 
jurisdiction of Virginia and Maryland, from which this 
territory was acquired by cession, is as perfectly excluded 
?vS is the authority and jurisdiction of the Emperor of all the 
IiUssias. 

The crc/usire character of the jurisdiction being apparent, 
the next question is, what is its extent ? The answer is 
la the language of the grant, that it extends to " all cases 
whatsoever." The framers of the Constitution could have 
employed no language of more comprehensive import than 
this — " All CA3CS whatsoever." But are there no limitations 
to this? Certainly. The grant is subject to the limita- 
tions which are incident to all legislative power. There 
are many things which no Legislature can rightfully do. It 
cannot pass an ex pofit facto law. It cannot, by a mere act 
of legislation, transfer the property of one individual to ano- 
ther. It cannot authorize the commission of crime. These, 
and such like limitations, exist in the present case; not be- 
cause of any thing in the language of the grant, but be- 
cause they arc inherent in the very nature of all legislative 
power. 

Now, will it be seriously contended that the abolition of 
slavery and the slave trade is embraced within these implied 
limitations of legislative power? Is it not within the com- 
petency of ordinary legislation? Have not slavery and 
the slave trade been abolished by many States of this 
Union; and that, not upon the ground, as has been sug- 
gested in debate, of interest merely, but because, when 
thoroughly examined, the pretended right to hold and 
iransfer men as property has been found to rest on no 
substantial foundation? Indeed, the opposers of these pe- 
titions themselves, by laboring as they do to derive a prohi- 
bition to legislate on this subject from the Constitution, and 
from the reservations in the cessions of this territory, man- 
ifestly betray an unwillingness to trust the claim to ex- 
emption from congressional legislation to the natural limi- 
tation of legislative power. 

It is said, indeed, by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Wise) that the States which have abolisliod slavery ''have 
not violated the great principle of vested rights, by taking 
slave property against the consent of the owners and with- 
out compensation;" but that they have merely "adopted the 
■post nati principle, and declared that rights which did not 
exist at the time .should never exist;" that is, that the 
issue of slaves, born after a certain future time, should 
Ijc free. Without stopping to inquire into the cor- 
rectness of this, in jxoint of fact, but, for the purposes 
of this argument, admitting it, let me ask what is 
the difference in principle between depriving an individual 
of his slave by act of legislation, and of the right to the 
issue of that slave by the same act? Upon common prin- 
ciples, an absolute right to the one as property necessarily 
carries with it a right to the other; and a iamier would re- 
sist as equal infringements of his rights, an attempt to take 
away his cattle, and a claim to deprive him of their future 
progeny. 

It would be appropriate here to go into an examination 
of the right which is claimed to hold men as property, and 
of the rightful extent of legislation on this subject. But 
it opens too broad a field for the present discussion, and I 
will not enter it. 

It thus appears that the right to legislate on the subjects 
of these petitions, which is manifestly included within the 
terms of the grant of power to Congress, is not excluded 
by operation of the principles which tbrm the basis of ordi- 
nary exceptions to the power of legislation. What is there, 
then, to exclude from the sweeping grant of power to legis- 
late "in all cases whatsoever," the power in question? 

An honorable gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wi.se) 
finds various grounds of implied exclusion in the Constitu- 
tion. He says there are certain admitted exceptions to the 
leffislative power of Conirress in regard to this District, 
which he enumerates; and thereupon proceeds to infer, 
from the fact of these exceptions, that the power in ques- 
tion is also excepted. 

Thus,he says that Congress is prohibited by the Consti- 
tution from suspending the writ of habeas corpus, from 
passing a law respecting the establishment of religion, and 



I'rom abridging the freedom of speech and of the press, ox 
the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, 
papers, and effects, &c., and asks if these prohibitions do 
not extend to the power of Congress to legislate for this 
District. Most certainly they do; but it is for the obvious 
reason that they are unlimited in their terms, and of course 
necessarily extend to the whole legislation of Congress. Is 
there any such Umitation of the power in question? Why, 
when the Convention was in the act of providing limita- 
tions to the powers which had been granted to Congress, 
in the 8th section of the first article of the Constitution, 
did they omit to limit specifically the power of legislation 
"in all cases whatsoever," which had been granted to Con- 
gress in reference to this District? 

Ag?jn: The gentleman from Virginia says, ifl rightly 
understand his argument, that the provision of the Consti- 
tution, that " the citizens of each State shall be entitled to 
all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several 
States," necessarily extends to the District of Columbia, 
and that Congress must be understood to be prohibited from 
disfranchising here the citizens of the several Slates; that is, 
that it cannot deprive them of the privileges of citizens of 
the District whenever they come into it. It is true it can- 
not, because there would be a gross and glaring absurdity 
in securing, as the Constitution does, the rights of citizen- 
ship in each State, to citizens of every other State, and, at 
the same time, denying the rights of citizenship in this Dis- 
trict — the common property of all the States — to the citi- 
zens of those States. And, besides, the very act of consti- 
tuting this ten miles square a District of the United States 
necessarily gives to the citizens of each and all the States 
common rights in it; not the rights which they each enjoy 
in their respective States — as the terms in which the gen- 
tleman states his argument would seem to imply — because 
that would constitute twenty-lour difterent rules of action, 
but the right of each resident and sojourner here, of being 
protected by the lawx made for the District, and the whole 
District. 

The exception, then, of a right to disfranchise a citizen 
of Virginia who may come here, rests iipon a principle 
hy^ving no possible relation to the case in question. 

But further. The gentleman from Virginia says that 
no person held to service or labor in a State, under the laws 
thereof, escaping into this District, can be discharged from 
such service or labor, but must be delivered up to the party 
to whom such service or labor may be due, and that this 
constitutes an exception froilv;the general power to legis- 
late " in all cases whatsoever for this District. I admit it 
does, and why? Plainly because the Constitution having 
expressly secured the right to the slave-owner to reclaim 
hia slave in any and every State of this Union, it would 
be a clear evasion of it, as well as a manifest absurdity to 
deny him that right, in a District which is the common 
property of the very States within which his right of reclama- 
tion is secured by the Constiti.tion. The exception in this 
case rests, therefore, substantially upon an express provi- 
sion of the Constitution, which, by no possibility of construc- 
tion, can sustain the exception in question. 

Again: The Constitution provides that " notax orduty 
shall be laid on articles exported from any State. No pre- 
ference shall bo given by any regulation of commerce or re- 
venue to the ports of one State over those of another ; nor 
shall vessels bound to or from one State be obliged to enter, 
clear, or pay duties in another." And the gentleman from 
Virginia contends that this prohibition must be regarded as 
extending to the commerce and the ports of the District of 
Columbia ; and if so, his inference is, that an implied pro- 
hibition of the abolition by Congress of slavery and the 
slave trade in the States must also be taken to extend to 
this District. 

The first clause of the provision of the Constitution ]v.r' 
referred to was designed to exempt the exports of the coun- 
try from taxation, and must, of necessity, be taken to extend 
to all the ports within it; otherwise, the entire object of the 
clause might be directly defeated. The remaining clauses 
of the provision, it will be observed, have exclusive refer- 
ence to the equality of privileges of the several States 
which they aim to preserve, by prohibiting Congress from 
favoring ♦he commerce, or the ports, or the navigation of 



one, at the expense of another. This it might do, in effect, 
jf the ports, and commerce, and navigation of this District 
might be exempted from the operation of the clauses in 
question. Thus, a preference of the port of Alexandria 
over that of Baltimore would disturb the equality of privi- 
lege which the Constitution intended to preserve between 
Virginia and Maryland. 

But what has all this to do with the subject under dis 
cussionl The provisions witli regard to commerce, &c. 
do not specifically reach it ; and it is only, therefore, from 
the supposed analogy between the implied limitation of the 
power of Congress in the cases cited, and the limitation 
sought to be established in the present case, that an argu- 
ment can be drawn in favor of the latter. But where is 
the analogy between an implied prohibition to abohsh sla- 
very in the States, and an express prohibition of a prefer- 
ence of the ports of one State over those of another State 1 
There is, indeed, a prohibition in both cases, but here the 
analogy ceases. If this is sufficient to establish the posi- 
tion of gentlemen, let us see what other positions it may es- 
tablish. Upon the same ground that Congress is prohibit- 
ed from abolishing slavery in the State of Virginia, for 
example, is it also prohibited from forbidding in that State 
the sale of lottery tickets, and the practice of gambling, and 
the crime of kidnapping. But could it not have enacted a 
prohibition of these practices in the city <jf Alexandria the 
moment it was ceded to the United Statcsl Could it not, 
in fact, have rendered valueless establishments for gaming, 
and receptacles for the kidnapped, which had been erected 
under the sanction of the laws of Virginia, if those laws had 
permitted such practices "] Would the gentleman from 
Virginia have exclaimed against the invasion of vested 
rights, the taking of private property for public use, without 
compensation? 

Again: The gentleman from Virginia says, the "local 
Legislature of this District cannot enter into any treaty, al- 
liance, or confederation, grant letters of marque and repri- 
sal, coin money," &c., and infers, if I understand him, that 
because this disability lesults, as he supposes, by implica- 
tion, from the inhibition to the States of the exercise of 
these powers, therefore the assumed disability of Congress 
to abolish slavery and the slave trade in this District may, 
in like manner, result from its want of power to put an end 
to these evils in the States. 

The whole of this argument rests on a false supposition 
with regard to the source of the inability of Congress, as a 
Legislature for this District, to make treaties, grant letters 
of marque, and coin money ; and falls to the ground when 
it is perceived that that inability results, not from the inhibi- 
tion to the States of the exercise of such powers, but from 
their utter inconsistency with both the purposes for which 
the power to legislate over this District was granted, and 
the relation which the District evidently bears to the 
Union. 

The gentleman from Virginia next proceeds to lay down 
the following general rules to restrain legislation over this 
District : 

1. " That nothing which Congress is expressly prohibit- 
" cd by the Constitution from doing as a National Legis- 
'■ lature, can it do as a Local Legislature for the District 
*' of Columbia." 

2. " That all the duties and obligations which the States 
" are bound by the Constitution to discharge and observe, 
" from one to the other, the District of Columbia, or its 
" Legislature, is bound to discharge and observe towards 
" the States, respectively." 

3. " That the Local Legislature of the District of Co- 
" lumbia can do no act, or pass no law, which the States arc 
" prohibited from doing or passing, by the Constitution." 

And how, let it be asked, do these rules affect the present 
question 1 No express prohibition to legislate on the sub- 
ject of State slavery is found in the Constitution, unless it 
be in the amendment which provides that " the powers not 
" delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor 
" prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States 
" respectively, or to the People." But if Congress cannot 
legislate on the subject of Slavery in this District, because 
the right to legislate upon it in the States is'- reserved to 
the States," how is it to legislate for the District at alll 



The subjects of evcry-day legislation for the District are 
subjects upon which Congress has no power to legislate 
for the States, and are, therefore, according to the gentle- 
man's argument, subjects on which it has no right to legis- 
late here. 

And how does the gentleman's second rule touch this 
subject? Are the States bound, by their " duties and obli- 
gations" towards each other, to refrain from abolishing 
Slavery and the Slave trade within their respective limits? 
Nobody pretends this. 

Many States have done it, and many more may yet do 
it, for any thing that can be found to the contrary in the 
Constitution. And can any greater evil result to any of 
the Slave States from the exercise of a power by Congress 
to abolish Slavery and the Slave trade within the limits of 
this District, than would result from the exercise, by tl 
States, of their admitted power of doing the same thir 
within their limits? May not Maryland, for example, 
she chooses, put an end to these evils within her limit 
And would not the exercise of the power be as dangeroi 
to the peace of the South, as would be the exercise of tl 
same power by Congress in regard to this District? 

And has the gentleman's third rule a more appropria 
application to the present question than either of the otheri 
To what purpose, in reference to this argument, is it to sj 
that Congress can pass no law in reference to this Distri 
which the States arc prohibited from passing? Are the Stat 
prohibited from passing laws abolishing Slavery and tl 
Slave trade within their respective limits? 

The gentleman from Virginia says, the Constitution d 
Clares that "private property shall not be taken for publ 
use, without just compensation." Supposing this to ha^ 
any application to the present case, it only involves the ii 
quiry, whether slaves can be rightfully emancipated I 
legislative authority, without providing a just compensatic 
to°their masters. This touches a question which I will n 
now discuss, namely : what is the foundation of the rig 
to the slave, which is said to be vested in the master? Co 
gress, however, are not asked to take private property f 
public use; but to free the African from the unnatural co 
dition of being the property of another, to the end, not th 
he may becoml; the property of the public, but the propriet 
of himself. But this is not all that we are called on to d 
We are asked to prohibit men from making merchandise 
their fellow-men ; from buying and selling them "tog 
gain." Do gentlemen talk of a compensation to the sla- 
merchant for the loss of such a privilege? Do they en 
touch the subject of the Slave trade within this Distric 
Dare they do it? Arc there any " vested rights" inthewj 
of legislation on this subject? Is there any question abo 
"compensation" involved?— any limitation growing out 
" the nature of society, and of government," to which tl 
gentleman from Virginia refers?— any express or implii 
infringement of the rights of the States?— any kind of o 
stacle, in short, but the want of a will, in those who ba- 
the power, to put down this abominable traffic. 

Having thus attempted to show that the power of Co 
gross to legislate on the subjects of these petitions, obviou 
ly included in the power to " exercise exclusive legislatic 
in all cases whatsoever," is not restrained by any natui 
limitations of legislative power, nor by any express or ii 
pHed limitations to be found in the Constitution, the que 
tion arises — Where is the limitation to be found for whi« 
gentlemen so earnestly contend? I am answered — in t) 
acts of cession, by which the States of Virginia and Mar 
land ceded the territory which forms this District to tl 
United States. Tliese acts, say gentlemen, are conclusi 
upon the subject. Let us see, then, if these States did, 
making the cessions, actually impose restrictions at va 
ance with the plain language of the Constitution; and wh 
ther Congress accepted grants thus restricted. 

The cession from Virginia was made by act of the L 
gislature of that State, on the 3d of December, 1789, 
the following words.* 

" Be it enacted by the General Asscmby, That a tn 



♦ The grant from Maryland was made on the 19th ofDece 
her, 1701. It is in the same language as the grant from Virgin 
and is limited by the same previso. 



8 



ef country, not exceeding ten miles square, or any lesser 
quantity, to be located within the limits of the State, and 
in any part thereof, as Congress may, by law, direct, shall 
be, and the same is hereby, forever ceded and reliaquished 
to the Congress and Government of the United States, in 
full and absolute right, and exclusive jurisdiction, as well 
of soil as of persons residing or to reside thereon, pursuant 
to the tenor and effect of the eighth section of the first arti- 
cle of the Constitution of the Government of the United 
States." 

This grant, it will be perceived, transfers to the United 
States " exclusive jurisdiction of soil and persons residing, 
or to reside thereon;" and adds, " pursuant to the tenor 
and effect of the eighth section of the first article of the 
Constitution of the Government of the United States;" that 
is, pursuant to that part of the Constitution which, as we 
have seen, expressly grants to Congress the power " to ex- 
ercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever." Here, 
then, instead of a restriction of the jurisdiction contem- 
plated in the Constitution, there is, both in direct terms, 
and by reference to that instrument, an express and clear 
confirmation of it. 

But, say gentlemen, there is a proviso which follows 
this grant, that contains the limitation contended for. Let 
us see. The proviso is as follows: " Provided that nothing 
herein contained shall be construed to vest in the United 
States any right of property in the soil, or to affect the 
rights of individuals therein, otherwise than the same shall 
or may be transferred by such individuals to the United 
States." Now, sir, is it not apparent, upon the slightest 
inspection of this proviso, that it limits the grant only so 
far as it extends to the soil, and was designed merely to 
protect the rights of individuals therein — (that is, in the 
soil) — trom the operation of that part of the cession which 
grants " the tract of country" to the United States " in 
full and absolute righf?" It seems to me, indeed, that, so 
far from limiting the grant in reference to the subject- 
matter now under consideration, this very proviso does, in 
effect, confirm it; since an express exception of one species 
of right from the operation of the grant, and one only, 
would seem to imply an exclusion of all other exceptions. 
It is, indeed, altogether incredible, that the Legislatures of 
Virginia and Maryland should have intended to restrict 
the United States in their power over the subject of slavery, 
without using language which would directly, or by clear 
implication, reach the case. 

The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wise) gives addi- 
tional force to this argument by asking — " Why was the 
"cession required! Why was their [the ceding States] 
" consent to the purchase of places required by the Consti- 
'"tution, if it was not to give the States the power of im- 
'' posing condition and restraint upon your legislation over 
" the ceded territory 1" 

" The power of imposing condition and restraint!" Ve- 
ry well. If this was the purpose, the States of Virginia 
and Maryland of course understood it, and would take 
care to impose in their grants, all the conditions and re- 
straints upon the legislation of Congress which they thought 
proper ; and to do it so plainly that even tlie way-faring 
man need not err in regard to them. Now, where are the 
conditions and restraints on which gentlemen rely 1 I have 
recited the whole : and who will say that they embrace 
any restraint upon the power of Congress touching the 
subject under consideration 1 Is not the omission, upon 
the gentleman's own view of the subject, decisive of the 
question "? 

But the gentleman, having looked into the grant, and 
seeing that no such "condition and restraint" was imposed 
there, seeks to find it in " the nature of society and govern- 
" ment in Maryland and Virginia ;" which he says is " of 
"itself, independent of conditions expressed in the acts of 
" cession, sufficient to restrain your power of legislation 
" over this subject." Thus, at one moment, a cession was 
provided for in the Constitution, to the end that the ceding 
States might impose condition and restraint upon the legis- 
lation of Congress; and, at the next, " the nature of so- 
ciety and government in Marjdand and Virginia is of it- 
self a sufficient restraint," without any thing expressed in 
the grant ! 



But, Mr. Speaker, what is the condition of the people of 
this District in regard to this important subject, if the 
power contended for is not granted to Congress "? Mary- 
land and Virginia, possessing the power to abolish slavery 
and the slave trade within their respective limits, had the 
power of doing it within the territory which now compose* 
this District. But they possess it no longer. Their juris- 
diction here is extinguished. The inhabitants of the ter- 
ritory are transferred to the United States, entirely divest- 
ed of all civil jurisdiction ; with no power to legislate on 
this or any other subject, but subjected to the " exclusive 
legislation" of Congress in "all cases whatsoever." How- 
ever much they may, at any time, desire to free the territo- 
ry from the curse of slavery and the slave trade, they are 
powerless. For any thing that they can do, by the force of 
law, thej and their children, and their children's children, 
to the latest time, must be doomed to see among them a 
traffic which makes merchandise of the bodies and the 
souls of their fellow-men; which marches through their 
streets, chained together, companies of human beings des- 
tined to the slave prison and the slave ship; and which 
agonizes their moral sensibilities by a severance of all the 
ties which bind man to his fellow-man, in the most valued 
and endeared relations of human life. 

I have thus shown that the power given to Congress over 
this subject, by the general grant in the Constitution, is af- 
fected, neither by the natural limitations to the exercise of 
legislative power, nor by any limitation, express or implied, 
in the constitution itself, nor by any contained in the ces- 
sions of this territory by the States of Maryland and 
Virginia. 

But the petitioners are here met with another objection 
to granting the prayer of these petitions. It is made a ques- 
tion of public safety. To begin the work of abolishing sla- 
very, and to banish the detestable traffic in human flesh 
from this District, will, we are told, tend to excite a spirit of 
insurrection in the Southern States ; and gentlemen give 
full rein to their imaginations in depicting the horrors of 
rape, rapine, and murder which will follow. I do not permit 
myself to doubt the perfect sincerity of gentlemen in these 
gloomy forebodings. I know they are in a position to see 
what I cannot see, and feel what I cannot feel. I will not 
allow myself to trifle with their views or feelings on this 
subject, though 1 must be permitted to doubt the correctness 
of the one, and the justness of the other. 

And may I not well doubt? It is true I do not profess a 
very familiar acquaintance with the disposition of the slave 
population, or the probable influence upon them of a dis- 
cussion of, and action upon, this subject. And while I 
would hesitate to oppose my own individual opinion to the 
assertions of honorable gentlemen, so confidently made, 
they must permit me to confront them, not altogether with 
my own opinions, but with the authority of intelligent and 
respectable slaveholders themselves. 

I hold in my hand a petition presented to this House in 
the year 1828, signed by more than eleven hundred citizens 
of this District, praying for t!ie abolition of slavery and the 
slave trade within its limits. It was referred to the Com- 
mittee on the District of Columbia, ajid remained unacted 
on until the last session, when it was called up, on motion 
of an honorable member from New Hampshire, (Mr. Hub-. 
BMJD.) and ordered to be printed, with the names of the 
signers. I send it to the Chair, and ask that it may be read 
by the Clerk. 

Here Mr. GARLAND, of Virginia, interposed, and 
said he should object to the reading of that and all other 
j)etitions on the subject, unless the gentleman used it as a 
part of his argument. 

Mr. SLADE replied that he intended so to use it, and 
should read it himself, but, being exhausted, he wished it 
read by the Clerk. 

Mr. GARLAND withdrew his objection, and consented 
to the reading, as an act of courtesy to Mr. S. 

The petition was then read by the Clerk, as follows: 

" 7'o the honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled: 
" We, the under-sisfned, citizens of tiie counties of Washington 
and Alexandria, in the District of Columbia, beg leave to call the 



9 



nttpnlion of your honorable body to an evil of sprioiis magnitude, 
whirl) greatly impairs the prosperity and happiness of this Dis- 
trict, and casts the reproach of inconsistency upon the free insti- 
tutions established among us. 

"While the laws of the United States denoimce the foreign 
slave trade as piracy, and punish willi death those who are found 
engaged in its perpetration, there exists in this 'District, the seat 
of the National Government, a domestic slave trade scarcely 
loss disgraceful in its character, and even more demoralizing in 
its influence. For this is not, like the former, carried on against 
a barbarous nation; its victims are reared up among the people 
of this country, educated in the precepts of the same religion, 
and imbued with similar domestic attachments. 

"Thffse people are,\vithout their consent, torn from their homes; 
husband and wife are frequently separated and sold into distant 
parts; children are taken from their parents, without regard to 
the ties of nature; and the most endearing bonds of afTeclion are 
broken forever. 
.. " Nor is this traffic confined to those who are legally slaves 

i for life. Some who are entitled to freedom, and many who have 
a limited time to serve, are sold into unconditional slavery; and, 
owing to the defectiveness of our laws, they are generally car- 
ried out of the District before the necessary steps can be taken 
for their release. 

" We behold these scenes continually taking place among us, 
and lament our inability to prevent them. The people of this 
District have, within themselves, no means of legislative redress; 
and we therefore appeal to your honorable body, as the only one 
invested by the American Constitution with the power to re- 
lieve us. 

" Nor is it only from the rapacity of slave traders that the 
colored race in this District are doomed to suffer. Even the 
laws which govern us sanction and direct, in certain cases, a 
procedure that we believe as unparalleled, in glaring injustice, 
by any thing at present known among the Governments of Chris- 
tendom. An instance of the operation of these laws, which oc- 
curred during the last summer, we will briefly relate: 

" A t^uiuica man, WHO statea iliai, lie was entitled to freedom, 
was taken up as a runaway slave, and lodged in the jail of Wash- 
ington City. He was advertised, but no one appearing to claim 
him, he was, according to law, put up at public auction for the 
payment of his jail fees, and sold as a slave for life! He was 
purchased by a slave trader, who was not required to give secu- 
rity for his remaining in the District, and he was, soon after, 
shipped at Alexandria for one of the Southern States. An at- 
tempt was made by some benevolent individuals 'o have the sale 
postponed until his claim to freedom could be investigated; but 
their efforts were unavailing; and thus was a human being sold 
into perpetual bondage at the capital of the freest Government on 
earth, without even a pretence of trial, or an allegation of crime. 

"We blush for our country while we relate this disgraceful 
transaction, and we would fain conceal it from the world, did not 
its very enormity inspire us with the hope tliat it will rouse the 
philanthropist and the patriot to exertion. We have no hesita- 
tion in believing your honorable body never intended that this 
odious law shoukl be enforced; it was adopted with the old code 
of Maryland, from which, we believe, it has been expunged since 
the District was ceded to the General Government. 

"The fact of its having been so recently executed, shows the 
necessity of this subject being investigated by a power which we 
confidently hope will be ready to correct it. 

"We are aware of the difficulties that would attend any at- 
tempt to relieve us fi-om these grievances by a sudden emanci- 
pation of the slaves in this District, and we would, therefore, be 
far from recommending so rash a measure. But the course pur- 
sued by many of the States of this Confederacy, that have hap- 
pily succeeded in relieving themselves from a similar burden, 
together with the bright example which has been set us by the 
South American republics, proves, most conclusively, that a 
course of gradual emancipation, to commence at some fixed pe- 
riod, and to take effect only upon those who may thereafter be 
born or removed into the District, might be pursued without de- 
triment to the present proprietors, and would greatly redound to 
the prosperity and honor of our country. 

"The existence among us of a distinct class of people, who, by 
their condition as slaves, are deprived of almost every incentive 
to virtue and industry, and shut out from many of the sources of 
light and knowledge, has an evident tendency to corrupt the 
morals of the people, and to damp the spirit of enterprise, by ac- 
customing the rising generation to look with contempt upon 
honest labor, and to depend for support too much upon the labor 
of others. It prevents a useful and industrious class of people 
from settling among us, by rendering the means of subsistence 
more precarious to the laboring class of whites. 

"It diminishes the resources of the community, by throwing 



the earnings of llie poor into the cofiers of the rich; thus ren- 
dering the former dependent, servile, and improvident; while 
the latter arc tempted to become, in the same proportion, lux- 
urious and prodigal. 

" That these'disastrous results flow from the existence of slavery 
among us, is sufiiciently conspicuous, when we contrast the lan- 
guishing condition of this District, and the surrounding country, 
with the prosperity of those parts of the Union which are Ifss 
favored in point of climate and location, but blessed with a free 
and industrious population. 

"We would, therefore, respectfully pray that these grievan- 
ces may claim the attention of your honorable body, and that a 
law of Congre.ss may be enacted, declaring that all children of 
slaves, born in the District of Columbia after the fourth day of 
July, eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, shall be free at iha 
age of twenty-five years, and that those laws, which authorize 
the selling of supposed runaways for their prison fees or main- 
tenance, may be repealed. 

"And, also, that laws may be enacted to prevent slaves from 
being removed into this District, or brought in for sale, hire, or 
transportation; without, however, preventing members of Con- 
gress, resident strangers, or travellers, from bringing and taking 
away with them their domestic servants." 

Mr. PAT TON inquired whether the gentleman from 
Vermont could infonn him how many of the signers were 
slave-holders. 

Mr. GARLAND made a further inquiry whether the 
gentleman from Vermont knew if they were all inhabitants 
of the District. 

Mr. SLADE replied, he could not infonn the gentleman 
how many of the signers were slaveholders. He personally 
knew some of them, and knew them to be owners of slaves. 
The list of names, some of which he read, embraced men of 
all the professions and employmr ' ' ' "" ^t 

lawyers, physicians, merchants -s. 

As to the question, said Mi .■> i 

were inhabitants of this Disti 
.swcr it. I can only say ths 

this House seven years agi_ '.■.•:■ ;• >• j;,i.\: '..a :<:■■ ,r. 

the Clerk's office ever since, open t^ ia- r-'^ctioi), axitl that 
it has been, during the past year, among the published doc- 
uments of this House; and, moreover, that it purports on 
its face to be a petition of inhabitants of this District. 
Under these circumstances, I submit whether there is not 
a sufficient presumption that it is what it purports to be, to 
put gentlemen upon proof of the contrary. 

And now, Mr. Speaker, let me entreat gentlemen to look 
into this petition. I do this the more earnestly, because 
they will find the names of many there, whom, I am per- 
suaded, they will not be inclined to charge either with ig- 
norance or fanaticism; but on whose truth and intelligence 
and judgment they will place the most confident reliance. 
They state facts which they arc in a condition to know, 
and advance opinions, the soundness of which is not 
liable to be affected by " northern prejudices" on this sub- 
ject. They are in the midst of slavery, and understand 
what it is. They have witnessed the slave trade, and know 
something of its horrors: and without any of the doubts of 
gentlemen in regard to the power of Congress on this sub- 
ject, and without any of the apprehensions with regard to 
the effect of its discussion upon the public peace and safe- 
ty, which has been made the subject of such glowing de- 
scriptions and gloomy anticipations, here and elsewhere, 
they fearlessly announce the truth in regard both to slave- 
r}' and the slave trade, and urgently appeal to Congress 
" as the only body invested by the American Constitution 
with power to relieve them." 

I submit, Mr. Speaker, whether it is not time that these 
petitioners, sustained as they are by the concurrent suppli- 
cations of their Northern brethren, should be heard and re- 
garded ; and whether the fact that eleven hundred citizens 
of this District have signed the petition which has just been 
read, is not a sufficient reply to the argument which has 
been drawn from considerations connected with a regard to 
the public safety. 

But further : The subject of the abolition of slavery, it 
is well known, was fully debated in the Legislature of 
Virginia in the year 1832, when the " injustice, tyranny, 
and oppression" of the slave system were openly and 



10 



btjklly maintained ;♦ and an effort was seriously made to 
commence a system of abolition which should look to the 
final, and not distant, extinction of slavery in that State. 
And did that discussion produce any symptoms of insurrec- 
tion among the slaves'? No, Sir. And why, indeed, 
should It 1 If you, sir, were the owner of one hundred 
slaves, and should seriously set about measures to give them 
the boon of freedom, do you think that the first intimation 
of it would beget in them a spirit of rebellion, and that it 
would rise in proportion as you should advance your bene- 
volent plans towards their consummation 1 To suppose 
this, is to suppose what I want evidence to believe of the 
African rac-e — that they are so lost to gratitude as to find no 
inducement to its exercise in such a manifertation of benevo- 
lent regard for them as this. 

Suffer me, sir, to dwell a few moments longer on the in- 
dications of opinion in Virginia on this subject, pending 
the agitation of the question in the Legislature of that 
State. While the subject was before a committee of the 
Legislature, the Editor of the Richmond Enquirer, a well 
known leading public journal at the Scat of Govern- 
ment of Virginia, said : 

" It is probable, from what we hear, that the committee on the 
colored population will report some plan for getting rid of the free 
people of color. But is this all that can be done? Are we for- 
ever to suffer the greatest evil which can scourge our land not 
only to remain, but to increase in its dini«nsions7 'We m-ay 
shut our eyes and avert our faces, if we please,' (writes an elo- 
f]uent South Carolinian, on his return from the North a few 
weeks ago,) ' but there it is, the dark and growing evil, at our 
doors; and meet the question we. must at no distant day. God 
only knows what it is the part of wise men to do on that momen- 
tous and appalling subject. Of this lam very sure, that the 
difference — nothing short of frightful — between all that exists 
on one side of the Potomac, and all on the other, is owing to 
that cause alone. The disease is deep seated; it is at the heart's 
core; it is consuming, and has all along been consuming,our vitals, 
and I could laugli, if I could laugh on s-uch a subject, at the ig- 
norance and folly of the politician who ascribes that to an act of 
the Government, which is the inevitable effect of the eternal laws 
of nature. What is to be done? Oh! my God, I don't know, 
but something must be done.' 

Yes, something must be done; and it is the part of no honest 
man to deny it; of no free press to affect to conceal it. When 
this dark population is growing upon us; when every new census 
is but gathering its appalling numbers upon us; when within a pe- 
riod equal to that in which this federal constitution has been in 
existence, those numbers will increase to more than 2,000,000 
within Virginia; when our sister Slates are closing their doors up- 
on otn- blacks for sale; and when our whiles are moving west- 
wardly in greater numbers than we like to hear of ; when 
this, the fairest land on all this continent, for soil and climate and 
situation combined, might become a sort of garden spot if it were 
worked by the hands of white men alone, can we, ought we to 
sit quietly down, fold our arms, and say to each other, 'well, well, 
this thing will not come to the worst in our day. We will leave 
it to our children and our grand-children and great-grand-chil- 
dren to take care of themselves, and to brave the storm?' Is this 
to act like wise men? Heaven knows we are no fanatics. We 
detest the madness which actuated the Amis des Noirs. But 
something ought to be done. Means sure, but gradual, system- 
atic but discreet, ought to be adopted for reducing the mass of 
evil which is pressing upon the South, and will still more press 
upon her the longer it is put off. We ought not to shut our eyes 
nor avert our faces. And though we speak almost without a 
hope, that the committee or the Legislature will do any thing, at 
the present session, to meet this question, yet we say now, in the 
utmost sincerity of our hearts, that our wisest men cannot give 



* The gentleman who opened the debate on the side of aboli- 
tion, said: " It was a truth held sacred by every American and 
by every Republican throughout the world, and he presumed it 
could not be denied in that Hall, as a general principle, that it is 
an act of injustice, tyranny, and oppression, to hold any part of 
the hiun^an race in bondage against their consent. That circum- 
stances may exist which may put it out of the power of the own- 
ers, for a time, to grant their slaves liberty, he admitted to be 
possible ; and if they do exist in any case, it may excuse, but 
not justify, the owner in holding them. The right to the enjoy- 
ment of liberty is one of the most precious, inherent, inalienable 
rights which pertain to the whole human race, and of which they 
can never be divested, except by an act of grosn injustice." 



too much of their attention to this subject, nor can they give it 
too soon." 

The hon. gentleman from Virginia will .suffer me to com- 
mend this expression of sentiment to the deliberate atten- 
tion whiL-h the high standing and responsible position of Us 
author, and tlie peculiar circumstances under which he 
wrote, eminently entitle it. Especially would I commend 
to the hon. gentleman from South Carolina the declara- 
tion of the "eloquent South Carolinian," embodied in the 
article I have ju.st read. The able Editor of the Richmond 
Enquirer, and his eloquent correspondent, both had a near 
view of the evils of slavery, and describe them in a language 
which at once attests their sincerity, and commands assent 
to the correctness of their views upon this "momentous 
and appalling subject." 

I will add, that the other leading paper at the capital of 
Virginia, the Richmond Whig, made about the same time 
the following declaration : 

" We affirm, that the great mass of Virginia herself tri- 
' umphs that the slavery question has been agitated, and 
' reckons it glorious that the spiritof her sons did not shrink 
' from grappling with the monster. We affirm that, in the 
' heaviest slave districts of the State, thousands have hailed 
' the discussion with delight, and contemplate the distant 
' but ardently desired result, as the supreme good which a 
' benevolent Providence could vouchsafe to their country." 

Mr. Speaker, if it was " glorious" and safe for Virginia 
to " grapple with the monster" in 1832, is it inglorious and 
unsafe for the Congress of the United States to grapple with 
the same monster now? 

Suffer me, Mr. Speaker, to present one more expression 
of opinion on this subject. I leave Virginia, and go over 
the mountains into the valley of the Mississippi ; and I 
there find the following leeeiu resolution or lUe o^uuu uf 
Kentucky upon the subject of emancipation : 

" Resolved, That a committee often be appointed, to consist of 
an equal number of ministers and ciders, whose business it shall 
be to digest and prepare a plan for the moral and religious in 
struction of our slaves, and for their future emancipation, and to 
report such plan to the several presbyteries within our bounds, 
for their consideration and approval." 

The coramitfcc appointed under this resolution, of whom 
John Brown, Esq. was chairman, and the Rev. John C. 
Young, President of Danville College, Secrctar)', made 
a report, in which, among other things, they say : 

" 1. A part of our sy.stem of slaveiy consists in depriving hu- 
man beings of the right to acquire property. 2. The depriva- 
tion of personal liberty forms another part of our system of sla- 
very. 3. The deprivation of personal security is the remain- 
ing'conatituent of our system of slavery." Its effects are said 
to be : " 1. To deprave and degrade its subjects, by removing 
from them the strongest natural checks to human corruption. 

2. It dooms thousands of human beings to hopeless ignorance. 

3. It deprives its subjects, in a great measure, of the privileges 
of the gospel. 4. This system licenses and produces great 
cruelty. 5. It produces general licentio\isness among the slaves. 

6. This system demoralizes the whites as well as the blacks. 

7. This system draws down upon us the vengeance of Heaven." 
These several points, in their order, are illustrated and enforc- 
ed at length. Then follow confutations of the various arguments 
of the defenders of tlie system. Then — 

" As the conclusion of all that has been advanced, we assert 
it to be the unquestionable duty of every Christian to use vigor- 
ous and immediate measures for the destniction of this whole 
system, and for the removal of all its unhappy effects. Both 
these objects should be contemplated in his etloits." 

Mr. Speaker, is it regarded by good and intelligent men 
in Kentucky as safe openly to recommend a " destruction 
of the whole system of slavery?" and shall we be quailing 
before the dangers of doing it in the District of Columbia 1 

But, sir, I have another authority on this subject. I re- 
turn from the Valley of the Mississippi to this District,and, 
lookincr into the United States Telegraph of the 4th of Sep- 
tembcr°last, I find the following : Speaking in the name 
of the Southern people, the Editor says : 

" We hold that our sole reliance is on ourselves : that we 
' have most to fear from the gradual operation on public 
' opinion among ourselves, and that those are the most in- 
' sidiousanddangerousinvadersof our rights and intercBts, 



11 



' who, coming to us in the guise of friendship, endeavor to 
' persuade us that slavery is a sin, a curse, an evil. It is 
' not true that the South sleeps on a volcano — that we are 
' afraid to go to bed at night — that we are fearful of murder 
' and pillage. Our greatest cause of apprehension is, from 
' the operation of the morbid sensibilitj' which appeals to 
' the consciences of our own people, and would make them 
' the voluntary instruments of their own ruin." 

So, then, the fears are not of insurrection, hut of co- 
eoitncf — not of the physical force of the slaves, but of the 
power ot'"public opitiion !" 

Need I, Mr. Speaker, repeat the expression of my sincere 
conviction, that the fears expressed by gentlemen on this 
floor are groundless 1 And is it not apparent, that the 
true ground of fear on this subject is to be found in a con- 
tinuance of the "dark and growing evil," so well described 
by the "'eloquent South Carolinian," to which our atten- 
tion has been directed? Permit me to add, in the language 
of the Richmond Enquirer, in the article I have read, that 
" our wisest men cannot give too much attention to this 
subject, nor can they give it too soon." 

But there is another objection sometimes urged against 
legislating on the subject of slaver)', which must not be 
overlooked in this discussion. Every attemjit to disturb the 
existing relation of master and slave, it is said, tends to dis- 
turb the balance of the Constitution, inasnuich as it was 
among the compromises which entered into the formation 
of that instrument, that three-fifths of the slaves should be 
represented in this body. 

Now, sir, in the first place, let it be observed that we are 
not asked to legislate on the abolition of slavery in Virginia 
or South Carolina, but in the District of Columbia; and that 
our legislation disturbs the balance of the Constitution only 
by the influence of its example upon the slaveholding 
States. 

In the second place, I contend that a just exercise of all 
tlic powers granted m the Constitution can never disturb 
its true balance, but is itself the preservation of that ba- 
lance. 

If the Constitution authorizes Congress to abolish Slave- 
ry in the District of Columbia, and the tendency of the ex- 
ercise of that power should be to aliolish Slavery in the 
Slave States, and thus reduce their representation in this 
bo<ly, it is a constitutional reinilt, of which no Stale has a 
right to complain. As well might we complain of the abo- 
lition of Slavery in the West India Islands by Great Bri- 
tain, because its tendency is to produce the same result in 
the United Slates. Neither Congress, in tlic one case, nor 
Great Britain, iii tlic other, is under any responsibility for 
the consequences of a rightful exercise of power — I mean, 
a responsibility to the Constitution in the one case, and the 
Law of Nations in the other. 

But, sir, the balance of the Constitution is already dis- 
turbed, in the other direction. When the Constitution was 
adopted, the Mississippi on the west, and Florida on the 
smith, formed the limits of the Confederated Republic. 
For any thing contemplated in the Constitution, these 
boundaries formed impassable limits, beyond which a slave 
population could not bring into Congress a representation 
upon that basis. The purchases of Louisiana and 



Florida have added two additional slave States, and will, 
probably, ere long, add two more. And do gentlemen re- 
flect how much this has disturbed the balance of the Con- 
stitution! 

But this is not all. The balance, in point of fact, has 
been disturbed, and must be more so, by the great relative 
increase of the slave population of the South, and the dimi- 
nution, almost the extinction, of it at the North. And 
although this is not, of course, an unconstitutional in- 
crease, yet it is obvious that the enormous and alarming 
relative increase of the slave population, compared with 
that of the whites, was not within the contemplation of 
the men who formed the Constitution. 

Thus, in the four Atlantic States south of the Potomac, 
the increase of the whites from 1790 to 1830 was 84 per 
cent.; while that of the slaves was, during the same period, 
130 per cent. In South Carolina the disproportion was 
still greater ; the increase of the whites, during the same 
period, having been 9-1 per cent., while that of the staves 
was 194 percent. 

To what results, Mr. Speaker, are the principles which 
produce such a disproportionate increase of population, 
to lead us 1 What will, in the progress of fifty years, 
become of the balance of the Constitution 1 These arc- 
questions which deeply concern the free States. 

But there is another question which comes home to the 
slave States with tremendous and appalling interest. What 
will be their condition half a century hence, in reference to 
this subject 1 That period will roll away ; and the princi' 
pies which govern the advance of the slave popalation will 
continue to operate '. And yet gentlemen sa)% " handt 
ofl " — let us alone. " We will leave it to our children, and 
' our grand-children, and our great grand-children, to 
' take care of themselves, and to brave the s'"-— '" 

But, sir, I will pursue this train of thou" 
leave it, and with it, the subject which t 
kindly indulged me in discussing. 

Deeply cominced, sir, that the petitioi 
to ask us to abolish slavery and the slave 
District, and that we have not oidy the ri 
our boundcn duty forthwith to commence the one, and t« 
begin and finish the other, I must ask, when the proper 
time shall come, that the jietitioiis shall be referred to a se- 
lect committee, to (he end that they nii^J^e the speedy aivJ 
decisive action of this body. It seeillH^|B to be du? iu^ 
the great importance of the subject thaWie^houId'lwthus 
disposed of Sir, we must not bury these petitions. And 
let me .say to gentlemen, that such a jiolicy will certainl"^ 
defeat itself You cannot smother investigation of th'k 
subject. Sir, the spirit of free inquiry is the master spirit 
of the age. It bows to the authority of truth and reasou 
ai'd Revelation; but it b.ows to nothing else. It must have 
free course, and it will have it; giving life and soul an<3 
energy to the march of lil^eral principles, and (?estined to 
shake every institution on earth which does not recognise 
the "inalienable rights" ofman, and bow to the supremacy of 
juiit and equal laws. And, sir, it shall move onward, and 
onward, and onward, until every kindred and ton<Tuc 8--* 
people under Heaven shall acknowledge and glory in 
great truth that " alu men ark crihted tat. au." 



/' 



Lh-Je 10 



Pi 



